2017 DMUC Key Discussion Highlights & Action Items

CMDP Training (Monday, 5/8 am and Thursday 5/11 am)

Feedback & Discussion:

User Defined Fields

User defined fields for CMDP came up in the context of sample point management (ex. By a school). In CMDP, there are user comment fields that could serve as a user defined field. CMDP does not support creation of customized data fields.

Adding Additional Analytes to Dropdown Menus

During primacy agency transition, the CMDP team is engaging State CMDP Administrators to determine if there are analytes that are regulated at the primacy agency level. As long as the reference data for the analyte conforms to the CMDP database schema, the state can add state-specific regulated analytes. The state would have to make these data available as part of its transition process. For example, the analyte name, analyte code, result UOM, method detection limit, detection limit UOM, applicable method name(s), applicable method codes, etc. These state-specific analytes will be stored in the reference tables and available to that primacy agency and its submitters.

Lag time / Effective dates

Lag times and effective dates are determined by the compliance determination process not the CMDP.

Request to include a box to mark “yes” or “no” for compliance

The CMDP’s primary purpose is to support laboratory and water systems electronic reporting of drinking water samples to primacy agencies All compliance determinations are done by SDWIS State or by Prime.

Composite Sample Migration to SDWIS State via DSE?

This requirement has been noted and added to the CMDP enhancement list for development.

Visually Indicate if Specific Validation Data is Available

No user interface design changes are currently planned for the CMDP. This enhancement idea could be implemented in the future.

How Does CMDP Resubmission Work to Correct Errors in the Validation Report?

The submitter has two options for correcting before e-signature:

Delete the entire sample Job (all Sample IDs even those without errors), or only the affected Sample IDs (within a Job).

Don’t delete anything. Use the Data Validation Report to identify which Sample ID has the error and then make the correction directly in CMDP using the web forms (for any submittal, everything is rendered as web forms so the user may see all the details).

If the submission job is signed electronically, the user will have to resubmit the affected Sample(s), i.e., the one(s) with errors, with a new Sample ID (or IDs) and as a new Sample Job. However, there is a planned enhancement to allow labs and PWSs to change the status of a certified Job, make corrections, and resubmit to the primacy agency.

What to do if you cannot get State CROMERR certification?

The CMDP application is CROMERR compliant because it uses OEI’s Shared CROMERR Services (SCS) for user management, registration and e-signature. EPA has determined that if the state has an existing Attorney General (AG) certification on file with the Agency, that certification will be interpreted to apply to drinking water data reported via CMDP, which dramatically simplifies the state’s CROMERR application. If the State’s AG does not support EPA’s interpretation, then the State will have to consult with OEI on steps to complete a new AG certification.

How is Lab Certification Transferred to the CMDP and Does that Affect Analyte Methods Available?

Lab certification information is often managed in SDWIS State (or another compliance database) by the primacy agency, but in some cases is managed in an entirely separate application (e.g., MS Access). As a result, the Data Portal Work Group (DPWG) that helped define CMDP requirements determined that migrating laboratory certification information would be a future enhancement. Other Lab information, such as contact, address, lab ID, lab name, etc., are transferred to the CMDP via the Data Sync Engine (DSE). There is currently no relationship between lab certification and the analytes available in the CMDP; a future enhancement could be implemented which filters analyte-method pairs by certification status.

More Clarity on When a CMDP Samples Job will not be Accepted by SDWIS State.

SDWIS State will accept jobs submitted to the CMDP that comply and pass XML Sampling data validations.

Clarify the Analyte Pairings that Exist in SDWIS State and CMDP. Publish what is Available?

The CMDP Team is currently exploring ways to publish the existing analyte-method pairings supported by the CMDP. The EPA Technical Support Center (TSC) also publishes supported analyte-method pairings.

What Happens When a Lab Does Not Define Their Methods?

All samples data should have a corresponding method associated with the sample. Currently in CMDP the method name is a federally required field, meaning there will be a validation warning in the Validations tab of the CMDP for a missing method.

What is the process for approving drinking water methods that would be allowed in SDWIS State?

Consultation with the EPA Cincinnati Technical Support Center would be required.

If a State Has Never Used Migrate to State, How Can They Acquire This?

Migrate to State is available through the SDWIS Help Desk or through ASDWA.

Configuration Options for Samples Data Validation. (Prime vs. CMDP).

The CMDP application validates lab or water-system reported samples as defined by the CMDP Sampling Data Dictionary. Sample validation in Prime is still under development.

Inactive Facility Samples? (Use Case Identification).

The use case was a lab reporting a sample via CMDP for an inactive facility. CMDP would not reject the sample associated with the inactive facility, but it might be rejected by XML Sampling/SDWIS-State, or determined to be an invalid sample by the state primacy agency’s compliance officer.

Residential sampling points (Lead and copper) Use Case: CMDP Will Not Accept Without a Predefined Sampling Point and Residential Sampling Creates a Business Case.

Sampling Point IDs and Names in CMDP are copies of equivalent data elements migrated directly from the primacy agency’s SDWIS/State tables (or other compliance database) via the Data Synchronization Engine (DSE). For samples collected from new sampling points not yet in CMDP, in addition to informing the primacy agency directly, a PWS CMDP Administrator could use the CMDP’s Profile Change Request feature to notify the state of a new sampling point. The primacy agency would then add this sampling point information to SDWIS/State, and the DSE would automatically migrate the new Sampling Point ID (and other information) at the next scheduled run (CRON job).

Clarify SCS & CMDP authentication. How can SCS be used to administer CMDP users?

The CMDP application uses Shared CROMERR Services (SCS) for user authentication. The CMDP application does not have independent authentication. SCS administers the roles in CMDP and are described in the SCS Role Registration User Guide. More information on SCS Administration for CMDP Administrator roles can be found in the Shared CROMERR Services Advanced Help Desk User Guide located on the CMDP Help Center.

Action Items:

Communicate definitive requirements for primacy agencies to add analyte pairings and how to add after transition.

Composite sampling already added to Jira.

Provide training on SCS use

RTCR Training (Monday, 5/8 pm)

Feedback & Discussion:

Experiencing many issues due to multiple triggers. RESPONSE: EPA will conduct the following training that addresses this issue:

DEI raised some conflicts with previous guidance. RESPONSE: In these situations, the rule is the decider. Any identified conflicts in the RTCR DEI should be sent to [enter Infrastructure lead]. EPA will address these conflicts accordingly (e.g., directly to the stakeholders; revisions to DEI).

NC has developed a dashboard that helps them manage samples that trigger RTCR actions and keep field and HQ staff coordinated.

Discussion on the need / priority level for tool(s) that can help primacy agencies create XML files for bulk data transfer

Need to alter our priority scheme…move away from High/Med/Low

SIWG Meeting (Tuesday, 5/9 am)

Feedback & Discussion:

Overall agreement on approach of doing Primacy Agency samples management in SDWIS Prime and not using CMDP for this need

Need to make crystal clear that this discussion is only around Primacy Agency samples data management – this has nothing to do with changing or touching CMDP for labs and utilities

Disagreement among the states regarding the use of the CMDP validation rules – some say you need the same validation rules for states/primacies that are in CMDP for labs/utilities

Definition of “minimum viable record”

What will be configurable for states

Conditionally required fields

Data validation rules vs CROMERR validation protocol

Error reporting needs to specify line item

What sample data is editable? Lab transfer vs PA entry

Actions Items:

Attain to document assumptions of data validation rules reuse within LOE for samples data management in Prime; estimate impact if we used different validation rules

Follow up with SIWG members for looking more specifically at question of data validation rules

Will follow up with product owners and SIWG regarding LOE and how to prioritize development and functionality

CMDP Attain Support

Attain ramping up to new level of almost doubled monthly support

Deric Teasley and Chris Durham (Attain) working on a process for a week by week projected look ahead of when Attain will be able to provide technical support to specific Primacy Agencies needing help beyond EPA Team help

Two tiered Attain support

More intense (higher hours) fast track transition support

Longer term (one to few hours) transition support

Improving Operations with Current Systems (Tuesday, 5/9 pm)

Feedback & Discussion:

There are a number of steps for data between state databases and ETT/ECHO. The time lag contributes to many of the common problems with the data.

Not including an implicit Return to Compliance also creates problems for data from some states. OECA is not comfortable making those decisions when they don’t have all the information they need.

The top 10 reporting errors come from three common problems – data duplication, referential integrity, missing required data. There are recommendations for how or resolve these common data errors.

Actions Items:

DMAC needs to reconcile this with the Data Quality Matrix.

Share with the community the % common errors relative to total data submitted.

We need to evaluate how these many errors will impact migration to Prime.

Identify actions in the draft Data Quality Improvement Plan (DMAC input over the next few months) to help improvement.

Share further info on Java resolution on SDWIS State

Getting to Know SDWIS Prime Part 1 (Wednesday, 5/10 am)

Feedback & Discussion:

New Prime edit checks, impact on data migration

Anticipation that Prime v1.0 may not provide all needed functionality, with primacy agency needing to supplement

Interest in within application help, thinking of links from points in application to data dictionary

Determine and communicate plan, capacity and approach for getting PA data into Prime for the 0.8 and subsequent releases so that PAs can effectively do testing as well as gap analysis for what is in Prime versus what is in current system.

Examples include migrating data from the SDWIS Fed Warehouse, levering the current DSE tools for inventory/LE, taking full Oracle dump and migrating in

Using Prime to Support Program Implementation (Wednesday, 5/10 pm)

Concerns on APIs -> should change very little, Interfacing Applications only need to send data requests to APIs (PAs don’t need to create APIs), what programming languages use APIs

Local data mart – most likely match SDWIS State schema, EPA pays for development, States might need to re-create additional objects (i.e. database views) that they have built from S/S.

Versions of Prime for testing, not needed much with APIs remaining stable

Transition Feedback & Discussion:

Clarification that use of the BPA is not required to transition to Prime, primacy agencies can use their in house and/or primacy agency specific contractor to transition to Prime

Question on if BPA vendors can handle large numbers of primacy agencies transitioning over same time period -> vendor’s bids on contracts are designed to be scalable, EPA will hold vendors accountable for delivering transition support

First BPA award (NH) using DWSRF set aside funds (10% “State Program Management” and 15% “Local Assistance and Other State Programs” set asides).